A Bromley woman says she desperately tried to save an elderly neighbour who died in a house fire this morning, while claims have been made firefighters were delayed by strikes.

The fire in Lancaster Close, near Bromley South station, left one man dead, named locally as Tom Challice, 90.

Stephany Cohen, 53, heard a fire alarm while making a cup of tea at 7am.

She told News Shopper: "I heard the alarm going off. We have an elderly neighbour upstairs who is bed-ridden.

"I have a set of keys to his flat so I let myself in and went to his bedroom. I saw his bed linen was on fire. He was shouting 'help, help'. He told me to go to the kitchen and get some water to put it out.

"I went to the kitchen but I couldn't find a bowl or anything to put the water in.

"I ran back down to my flat and told my flat mate to call the fire brigade. I grabbed a bowl from my kitchen and ran back up.

"This time I couldn't even get through the front door because the smoke was so horrendous.

"I couldn't even see into his room. The smoke had just taken hold so quickly."

Ms Cohen said she often visited Mr Challice, whose wife is in a home, and she and other neighbours helped him with chores.

She added the former railway officer suffered from diabetes and was looked after by carers.

She said: "It was just yesterday I was getting a set of keys cut for him. He was a very individually-spirited person, but he needed people to help him.

"We all look out for each other on this little estate."

Neighbour Patricia Westrup, 69, added: "It is just a shock. It is so traumatic, I'm still trembling.

"We all used to look after him, do his shopping. He had fantastic carers who visited him. Now it's all ended just like this.

"He had a good brain as well. He liked his horse racing and his sports. He always had his copy of the Telegraph. It is so sad."

Les Hobday, 87, said: "He was just a nice guy. He was very trusting. I got £300 out of a cash machine for him yesterday - that's how much he trusted me."

Fire service 'delayed by strikes'

There has been a suggestion strike action may have affected the response time to today's fatal fire.

Fire Brigades Union (FBU) London region has said it may be that strike action impacted how the emergency was dealt with.

News Shopper has been told a contingency fire crew waited outside the premises for a senior officer to arrive, who then instructed the team to enter in breathing apparatus.

It is understood a regular crew would have gone into the building immediately upon arrival, increasing the chance of rescuing the victim.

Regional secretary Paul Embery said in a statement today (July 16): “This fire is a tragedy, and our thoughts go out to the victim’s family.

"Our information suggests that the strikebreaking fire crews took significantly longer to arrive than regular crews would have done.

"Londoners were told by the government’s fire minister Brandon Lewis that ‘robust’ contingency arrangements were in place for strike periods.

"Clearly, those arrangements have failed disastrously, and a full investigation must take place to determine what went wrong.”

Mr Embery explained staff at Bromley fire station staged a pre-notified two-hour strike from 6am until 8am this morning and yesterday and said London Fire Brigade use a private contractor during any industrial action to provide relief cover.

He said: "The problem is that company only has 27 engines available across the whole of the London area where normally there would be around 150 engines manned by regular, fully-trained crew.

"The relief engines are placed at various strategic points around London, not at fire stations, but I don't know where the one came from that arrived at this incident in Bromley.

"However, it's my information that it took significantly longer than the standard target response time of within six minutes - it possibly took as long as 14 to 18 minutes to get there from the time of the call.

"That in itself is a problem. Then, to add to that, I know from the evidence of the post-incident log report that the relief engine crew then waited outside the building before a senior officer arrived who instructed them to enter it with breathing apparatus.

"I don't know how long that delay was, I believe it was possibly only a short amount of time, but it added to the problem.

"We can't say if quicker action would have prevented the man's death but it's very clear that the delays didn't help and it may have resulted in a different outcome."

A London Fire Brigade (LFB) spokesperson said: “Emergency fire contingency crews were called to a maisonette fire on Lancaster Close in Bromley this morning.

"The body of a man was found in the bedroom. Sadly he was pronounced dead at the scene. Half of the maisonette on the first floor was damaged by the blaze.

"The Brigade was called at 0717 and the fire was under control by 0802. The cause of the fire is under investigation.”

LAS sent an ambulance crew, duty officer, and a hazardous area response team, while police officers were also called at around 7.20 to reports of a fire at a maisonette.

A police spokesman said: "Officers attended and subsequently LFB found a body of a man in the address.

"He was pronounced dead at the scene. Next of kin have not been informed and enquiries are underway to do this.

"Whilst officers believe they know who the deceased is they await next of kin to be informed and a formal identification.

"The death is being treated as unexplained and the cause of the fire is being investigated.

Comments (23)

Real fireman wouldnt put peoples lives at risk over strike action... there is a huge waiting list to become a fireman so why not give someone who's happy with the pay a job! I respect anyone who are fireman, police officers, nurses etc... and also believe they should receive a decent pay but, do you really think putting peoples lives at risk is the right way to go about getting an increase???

If everyone who were unhappy with their pay were to walk out of their jobs i think you would find 40% or more of the working sector would be at home sitting on their arses right now.

Real fireman wouldnt put peoples lives at risk over strike action... there is a huge waiting list to become a fireman so why not give someone who's happy with the pay a job! I respect anyone who are fireman, police officers, nurses etc... and also believe they should receive a decent pay but, do you really think putting peoples lives at risk is the right way to go about getting an increase???
If everyone who were unhappy with their pay were to walk out of their jobs i think you would find 40% or more of the working sector would be at home sitting on their arses right now.kentlad

kentlad
you really do not have a clue, go and do some research and stop being so ignorant. it has nothing to do with pay why they are on strike. Also brandon lewis said contingency crews are adequate and up to the job, they clearly are not. they had to wait for a senior officer to arrive before being commited. real firefighters would of been in there 2 minutes after arrival. they are on strike due to pension theft. and would you let a 60 year old woman fight fires. goi do some real research and reply. instead of talking a load of rubbish...my thoughts are with the family

kentlad
you really do not have a clue, go and do some research and stop being so ignorant. it has nothing to do with pay why they are on strike. Also brandon lewis said contingency crews are adequate and up to the job, they clearly are not. they had to wait for a senior officer to arrive before being commited. real firefighters would of been in there 2 minutes after arrival. they are on strike due to pension theft. and would you let a 60 year old woman fight fires. goi do some real research and reply. instead of talking a load of rubbish...my thoughts are with the familyflames18

Get the facts right before you post firefighters are NOT striking over pay they are striking over changes to their pension rights & being made to work till they are 60 & being sacked if fitness levels drop & not receiving all of their pension.
Do your homework before spout off!!!!

Get the facts right before you post firefighters are NOT striking over pay they are striking over changes to their pension rights & being made to work till they are 60 & being sacked if fitness levels drop & not receiving all of their pension.
Do your homework before spout off!!!!Roo2201

"they are on strike due to pension theft". Really? Oh, I must have missed the FBU going on strike and protesting when Labour were robbing the private sector's pension funds.

To blame the contingency provisions is scraping the bottom of the barrel. If someone sunk a boat by punching a hole in the bottom of it, would you blame the person who didn't bail out the water fast enough?

Firefighters should not strike. Period. If you don't like the terms and conditions, move. As kentlad says, there's plenty more out there willing to take over.

"they are on strike due to pension theft". Really? Oh, I must have missed the FBU going on strike and protesting when Labour were robbing the private sector's pension funds.
To blame the contingency provisions is scraping the bottom of the barrel. If someone sunk a boat by punching a hole in the bottom of it, would you blame the person who didn't bail out the water fast enough?
Firefighters should not strike. Period. If you don't like the terms and conditions, move. As kentlad says, there's plenty more out there willing to take over.Eagles_Man

Roo2201 wrote:
Get the facts right before you post firefighters are NOT striking over pay they are striking over changes to their pension rights &amp; being made to work till they are 60 &amp; being sacked if fitness levels drop &amp; not receiving all of their pension.
Do your homework before spout off!!!!

Perhaps you need to get your facts straight too. A 60 year old today is as fit - if not fitter - than a 50 year old was 30 years ago.

[quote][p][bold]Roo2201[/bold] wrote:
Get the facts right before you post firefighters are NOT striking over pay they are striking over changes to their pension rights & being made to work till they are 60 & being sacked if fitness levels drop & not receiving all of their pension.
Do your homework before spout off!!!![/p][/quote]Perhaps you need to get your facts straight too. A 60 year old today is as fit - if not fitter - than a 50 year old was 30 years ago.Eagles_Man

Ohhh poor things having to work until 60. My heart bleeds for the poor overworked fire fairies. Perhaps we will have to get new cots instead of beds for them as they get older incase they fall out in their sleep.

Ohhh poor things having to work until 60. My heart bleeds for the poor overworked fire fairies. Perhaps we will have to get new cots instead of beds for them as they get older incase they fall out in their sleep.Gypo.Joe

flames18 wrote:
kentlad
you really do not have a clue, go and do some research and stop being so ignorant. it has nothing to do with pay why they are on strike. Also brandon lewis said contingency crews are adequate and up to the job, they clearly are not. they had to wait for a senior officer to arrive before being commited. real firefighters would of been in there 2 minutes after arrival. they are on strike due to pension theft. and would you let a 60 year old woman fight fires. goi do some real research and reply. instead of talking a load of rubbish...my thoughts are with the family

I wasnt just refering to the story above i'm talking about previous strike action over pay and pensions. And i think you will find i do know what i am talking about as i have two relatives who are firemen and even they disagree with strike action but, unfortunatley because most of their moron colleagues feel strike action is acceptable they have no choice but, to follow in their actions.

You are obviously a fireman and i take my hat off to you for doing a great job and i mean that from the heart. I also agree that your pensions should be adequate enough to retire at a reasonable age.

You arent the only people who have been robbed of a pension i have lost thousands over the past few years from my pension company gambling with my money.

[quote][p][bold]flames18[/bold] wrote:
kentlad
you really do not have a clue, go and do some research and stop being so ignorant. it has nothing to do with pay why they are on strike. Also brandon lewis said contingency crews are adequate and up to the job, they clearly are not. they had to wait for a senior officer to arrive before being commited. real firefighters would of been in there 2 minutes after arrival. they are on strike due to pension theft. and would you let a 60 year old woman fight fires. goi do some real research and reply. instead of talking a load of rubbish...my thoughts are with the family[/p][/quote]I wasnt just refering to the story above i'm talking about previous strike action over pay and pensions. And i think you will find i do know what i am talking about as i have two relatives who are firemen and even they disagree with strike action but, unfortunatley because most of their moron colleagues feel strike action is acceptable they have no choice but, to follow in their actions.
You are obviously a fireman and i take my hat off to you for doing a great job and i mean that from the heart. I also agree that your pensions should be adequate enough to retire at a reasonable age.
You arent the only people who have been robbed of a pension i have lost thousands over the past few years from my pension company gambling with my money.kentlad

Roo2201 wrote:
Get the facts right before you post firefighters are NOT striking over pay they are striking over changes to their pension rights &amp; being made to work till they are 60 &amp; being sacked if fitness levels drop &amp; not receiving all of their pension.
Do your homework before spout off!!!!

Get your facts right... response time was '14 to 18mins' by the relief crew who were covering your shift. This is nearly three times the response time required. You have blood on your hands for your selfish actions not me!

Hope you sleep well at night.

If you arent up for the job you should be fired in all honestly as you could be risking someones life if you wasnt fit enough.

[quote][p][bold]Roo2201[/bold] wrote:
Get the facts right before you post firefighters are NOT striking over pay they are striking over changes to their pension rights & being made to work till they are 60 & being sacked if fitness levels drop & not receiving all of their pension.
Do your homework before spout off!!!![/p][/quote]Get your facts right... response time was '14 to 18mins' by the relief crew who were covering your shift. This is nearly three times the response time required. You have blood on your hands for your selfish actions not me!
Hope you sleep well at night.
If you arent up for the job you should be fired in all honestly as you could be risking someones life if you wasnt fit enough.kentlad

Tragic - but I wonder even if there hadn't been a strike would it have made any difference?

Ms Cohen went back to her flat, told her flatmate to call the fire brigade, by the time she went back with a bowl she couldn't get in due to the smoke

So if a regular crew had arrived within 6 minutes it might have been too late

Tragic - but I wonder even if there hadn't been a strike would it have made any difference?
Ms Cohen went back to her flat, told her flatmate to call the fire brigade, by the time she went back with a bowl she couldn't get in due to the smoke
So if a regular crew had arrived within 6 minutes it might have been too latereasonable75

Roo2201 wrote:
Get the facts right before you post firefighters are NOT striking over pay they are striking over changes to their pension rights &amp; being made to work till they are 60 &amp; being sacked if fitness levels drop &amp; not receiving all of their pension.
Do your homework before spout off!!!!

Perhaps you need to get your facts straight too. A 60 year old today is as fit - if not fitter - than a 50 year old was 30 years ago.

Ohh Eagles Man. Please advise us where you get your facts from. I am anxious to hear the evidence to back up your claims that 60 year olds are fit or fitter than 50 year olds 30 years ago.

If you were trapped in a fire whist in a room making up more rubbish to post on the Newshopper, I feel fairly certain you would not want a couple of 60 year olds coming into save you.

With regards to your suggestion that firefighters should just accept whatever they are offered is as absurd as it is insulting. You may have to decided to spend your life bending over and taking it, others have more integrity. It is not a race to the bottom.

[quote][p][bold]Eagles_Man[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Roo2201[/bold] wrote:
Get the facts right before you post firefighters are NOT striking over pay they are striking over changes to their pension rights & being made to work till they are 60 & being sacked if fitness levels drop & not receiving all of their pension.
Do your homework before spout off!!!![/p][/quote]Perhaps you need to get your facts straight too. A 60 year old today is as fit - if not fitter - than a 50 year old was 30 years ago.[/p][/quote]Ohh Eagles Man. Please advise us where you get your facts from. I am anxious to hear the evidence to back up your claims that 60 year olds are fit or fitter than 50 year olds 30 years ago.
If you were trapped in a fire whist in a room making up more rubbish to post on the Newshopper, I feel fairly certain you would not want a couple of 60 year olds coming into save you.
With regards to your suggestion that firefighters should just accept whatever they are offered is as absurd as it is insulting. You may have to decided to spend your life bending over and taking it, others have more integrity. It is not a race to the bottom.Rightly so

kentlad wrote:
Real fireman wouldnt put peoples lives at risk over strike action... there is a huge waiting list to become a fireman so why not give someone who's happy with the pay a job! I respect anyone who are fireman, police officers, nurses etc... and also believe they should receive a decent pay but, do you really think putting peoples lives at risk is the right way to go about getting an increase???

If everyone who were unhappy with their pay were to walk out of their jobs i think you would find 40% or more of the working sector would be at home sitting on their arses right now.

I respect anyone who are fireman, police officers, nurses etc.. Really! Do you remember PC Simon Harwood to name but a few bad coppers. Not to mention some of the bad and lazy nurses that have cost lives.

I respect any one who does a good job and not because they happen to wear a uniform

[quote][p][bold]kentlad[/bold] wrote:
Real fireman wouldnt put peoples lives at risk over strike action... there is a huge waiting list to become a fireman so why not give someone who's happy with the pay a job! I respect anyone who are fireman, police officers, nurses etc... and also believe they should receive a decent pay but, do you really think putting peoples lives at risk is the right way to go about getting an increase???
If everyone who were unhappy with their pay were to walk out of their jobs i think you would find 40% or more of the working sector would be at home sitting on their arses right now.[/p][/quote]I respect anyone who are fireman, police officers, nurses etc.. Really! Do you remember PC Simon Harwood to name but a few bad coppers. Not to mention some of the bad and lazy nurses that have cost lives.
I respect any one who does a good job and not because they happen to wear a uniformthe wall

Roo2201 wrote:
Get the facts right before you post firefighters are NOT striking over pay they are striking over changes to their pension rights &amp; being made to work till they are 60 &amp; being sacked if fitness levels drop &amp; not receiving all of their pension.
Do your homework before spout off!!!!

Perhaps you need to get your facts straight too. A 60 year old today is as fit - if not fitter - than a 50 year old was 30 years ago.

The Government commissioned a report ( Williams report) to investigate firefighters ability to do the job as they age.
The Williams report showed that 66% of male firefighters and 99% of female firefighters would fail the fitness tests required by the Government to remain as firefighters.
At the same time as requiring firefighters to work an extra 10 years before receiving a pension ,the Government increased the fitness standard from a VO2 Max of 36 to VO2 Max of 47 .These standards are the same for both Genders and make no allowance for age.
As the Williams report undermined the Government desire to change the pension scheme they buried the report and hid the findings.
London firefighters are left with fact that they currently pay 14.7 % of their pay into a scheme from which the probability is that they will not remain fit enough for long enough to receive the pension they signed on for.
I am sorry that other members of society have had their pensions stolen from them by the Government and surprised that so many of them have rolled over without a fight to protect what is theirs.

[quote][p][bold]Eagles_Man[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Roo2201[/bold] wrote:
Get the facts right before you post firefighters are NOT striking over pay they are striking over changes to their pension rights & being made to work till they are 60 & being sacked if fitness levels drop & not receiving all of their pension.
Do your homework before spout off!!!![/p][/quote]Perhaps you need to get your facts straight too. A 60 year old today is as fit - if not fitter - than a 50 year old was 30 years ago.[/p][/quote]The Government commissioned a report ( Williams report) to investigate firefighters ability to do the job as they age.
The Williams report showed that 66% of male firefighters and 99% of female firefighters would fail the fitness tests required by the Government to remain as firefighters.
At the same time as requiring firefighters to work an extra 10 years before receiving a pension ,the Government increased the fitness standard from a VO2 Max of 36 to VO2 Max of 47 .These standards are the same for both Genders and make no allowance for age.
As the Williams report undermined the Government desire to change the pension scheme they buried the report and hid the findings.
London firefighters are left with fact that they currently pay 14.7 % of their pay into a scheme from which the probability is that they will not remain fit enough for long enough to receive the pension they signed on for.
I am sorry that other members of society have had their pensions stolen from them by the Government and surprised that so many of them have rolled over without a fight to protect what is theirs.Methodman

Some 60 year olds could keep themselves fit and pass the fitness test – of course they could. We never said they couldn’t do it. I ask you to picture a 58 year old running around with an air tank on their back, whilst dragging heavy hoses. I would agree that there are 60 years olds that could do even that, you may even know them. But I’d hazard a guess that most 60 year olds couldn’t. And for the sake of a reasonable debate; don’t reference the fitness levels of 72 year olds you know – some people know pilots that have been in space, it doesn’t mean that everyone is capable of being an astronaut. (33% of fire fighters are estimated to fail the test – which will be the older staff which means the government will steal a bigger slice of their pension pot)

Retiring on £19000 a year is a good pension – yes it is, which is why we joined it, paid our contributions and looked forward to getting it. However £19000 is the maximum we can get, if joining at 20 and working for 40 years. We won’t settle this without an honest debate, so use an honest number.

Stop using the ‘saving persons from a burning building analogy it’s their job’ – really…? If we saved you and your family from your burning building, you’d wipe yourself down say ‘well, don’t expect thanks from me – you were just doing your job’.
Well, yes we were, but it’s a kind of special job don’t you think? And it demands decent pay. Imagine the job advert in your world: “Fire Fighter’s needed. Duties occasionally include entering burning buildings, cutting people out of cars in hostile conditions and fire prevention. Salary: from just above bread line to crap, dependant on experience”.

The economic situation is all Labour’s fault – that’s a bigger argument, but I don’t really care. Labour, Conservative or Lib Dem, the representatives of the supposedly Great British Public promised those fire fighters those pensions in exchange for work and contributions. They gave the work and the money, now give them the pensions you promised.

I’d love to get such a high pension – WELL WHY DIDN’T YOU BECOME A FIRE FIGHTER THEN?!?!? this is the only argument that simply fills me with utter rage. Each and every one of those fire fighters had to apply for those jobs. If you wanted that pension, or their wages, why didn’t you get the job yourself? Or any one of the other public sector jobs that have a good pension attached? The fact that you have a terrible pension is not an argument to reduce somebody else’s. As I said before it’s the very worst characteristics of being British – the petty small minded, jealous mind-set that just can’t stand to see someone else do better. And don’t forget one of the reasons they have a better pension than you is because they pay more into it than you do.

I understand that we’ve got to cut costs and it’s got to be quick and radical, but it’s got to be fair.

It’s not fair to say to those soldiers, go to Afghanistan and protect the country, but you might be made redundant in a few years, and we don’t have any harriers to protect you with, or even an aircraft carrier to launch them from.

It’s not fair to say to a nurse, tend my wounds, dodge the angry drunk in A&E, clean the corridors and solve MRSA and take the blame for every mis-step caused by stupid government targets, but don’t expect the pay rise we promised you next year.

It’s not fair to say to teachers, put up with threats from pupils and parents, get our school into the top of the exam league tables, meet our targets and take the blame for not spotting child abuse, but don’t expect the pension we promised.

What I do support is the concept of fairness.

Fair is a word that has become increasingly warped over the years in the UK. So let me bend it back into shape. If you pay for something, you should get it. There should be no question about it. You could change the pension scheme for new entrants, that would be fair. You could reduce the salary scales for new entrants too, that would be fair. You could hold a referendum asking if the public would be prepared to have poorer public services in exchange for a drop in taxes, that would also be fair.

What is not fair, is promising a certain pension and wage, in exchange for performing their duties at a very high level of competence, and then when they do so, refuse to give them the pension and wage that was promised.

That’s why I support the fire fighters, and all the public services and in fact anyone screwed out of their pension in the public OR private sectors. They’re just asking for what you promised them. Not a penny more, nor a penny less. They did their bit, now you do yours. Don’t dip out on your commitments just because it’s convenient. Because if you abandon your commitment to fairness, then you won’t be able to argue when the government treats you unfairly.

Why the firefighters matter.
Some 60 year olds could keep themselves fit and pass the fitness test – of course they could. We never said they couldn’t do it. I ask you to picture a 58 year old running around with an air tank on their back, whilst dragging heavy hoses. I would agree that there are 60 years olds that could do even that, you may even know them. But I’d hazard a guess that most 60 year olds couldn’t. And for the sake of a reasonable debate; don’t reference the fitness levels of 72 year olds you know – some people know pilots that have been in space, it doesn’t mean that everyone is capable of being an astronaut. (33% of fire fighters are estimated to fail the test – which will be the older staff which means the government will steal a bigger slice of their pension pot)
Retiring on £19000 a year is a good pension – yes it is, which is why we joined it, paid our contributions and looked forward to getting it. However £19000 is the maximum we can get, if joining at 20 and working for 40 years. We won’t settle this without an honest debate, so use an honest number.
Stop using the ‘saving persons from a burning building analogy it’s their job’ – really…? If we saved you and your family from your burning building, you’d wipe yourself down say ‘well, don’t expect thanks from me – you were just doing your job’.
Well, yes we were, but it’s a kind of special job don’t you think? And it demands decent pay. Imagine the job advert in your world: “Fire Fighter’s needed. Duties occasionally include entering burning buildings, cutting people out of cars in hostile conditions and fire prevention. Salary: from just above bread line to crap, dependant on experience”.
The economic situation is all Labour’s fault – that’s a bigger argument, but I don’t really care. Labour, Conservative or Lib Dem, the representatives of the supposedly Great British Public promised those fire fighters those pensions in exchange for work and contributions. They gave the work and the money, now give them the pensions you promised.
I’d love to get such a high pension – WELL WHY DIDN’T YOU BECOME A FIRE FIGHTER THEN?!?!? this is the only argument that simply fills me with utter rage. Each and every one of those fire fighters had to apply for those jobs. If you wanted that pension, or their wages, why didn’t you get the job yourself? Or any one of the other public sector jobs that have a good pension attached? The fact that you have a terrible pension is not an argument to reduce somebody else’s. As I said before it’s the very worst characteristics of being British – the petty small minded, jealous mind-set that just can’t stand to see someone else do better. And don’t forget one of the reasons they have a better pension than you is because they pay more into it than you do.
I understand that we’ve got to cut costs and it’s got to be quick and radical, but it’s got to be fair.
It’s not fair to say to those soldiers, go to Afghanistan and protect the country, but you might be made redundant in a few years, and we don’t have any harriers to protect you with, or even an aircraft carrier to launch them from.
It’s not fair to say to a nurse, tend my wounds, dodge the angry drunk in A&E, clean the corridors and solve MRSA and take the blame for every mis-step caused by stupid government targets, but don’t expect the pay rise we promised you next year.
It’s not fair to say to teachers, put up with threats from pupils and parents, get our school into the top of the exam league tables, meet our targets and take the blame for not spotting child abuse, but don’t expect the pension we promised.
What I do support is the concept of fairness.
Fair is a word that has become increasingly warped over the years in the UK. So let me bend it back into shape. If you pay for something, you should get it. There should be no question about it. You could change the pension scheme for new entrants, that would be fair. You could reduce the salary scales for new entrants too, that would be fair. You could hold a referendum asking if the public would be prepared to have poorer public services in exchange for a drop in taxes, that would also be fair.
What is not fair, is promising a certain pension and wage, in exchange for performing their duties at a very high level of competence, and then when they do so, refuse to give them the pension and wage that was promised.
That’s why I support the fire fighters, and all the public services and in fact anyone screwed out of their pension in the public OR private sectors. They’re just asking for what you promised them. Not a penny more, nor a penny less. They did their bit, now you do yours. Don’t dip out on your commitments just because it’s convenient. Because if you abandon your commitment to fairness, then you won’t be able to argue when the government treats you unfairly.Hatersgonnahate

kentlad wrote:
Real fireman wouldnt put peoples lives at risk over strike action... there is a huge waiting list to become a fireman so why not give someone who's happy with the pay a job! I respect anyone who are fireman, police officers, nurses etc... and also believe they should receive a decent pay but, do you really think putting peoples lives at risk is the right way to go about getting an increase???

If everyone who were unhappy with their pay were to walk out of their jobs i think you would find 40% or more of the working sector would be at home sitting on their arses right now.

It's firefighters not fireman. The ballot result will reflect the majority supporting the action. There is no waiting list for the fire service in London, recruitment freeze & closure of 10 London stations with need to lose 500 plus posts put paid to any recruitment for the next 5 plus years.

[quote][p][bold]kentlad[/bold] wrote:
Real fireman wouldnt put peoples lives at risk over strike action... there is a huge waiting list to become a fireman so why not give someone who's happy with the pay a job! I respect anyone who are fireman, police officers, nurses etc... and also believe they should receive a decent pay but, do you really think putting peoples lives at risk is the right way to go about getting an increase???
If everyone who were unhappy with their pay were to walk out of their jobs i think you would find 40% or more of the working sector would be at home sitting on their arses right now.[/p][/quote]It's firefighters not fireman. The ballot result will reflect the majority supporting the action. There is no waiting list for the fire service in London, recruitment freeze & closure of 10 London stations with need to lose 500 plus posts put paid to any recruitment for the next 5 plus years.Hatersgonnahate

Eagles_Man wrote:
&quot;they are on strike due to pension theft". Really? Oh, I must have missed the FBU going on strike and protesting when Labour were robbing the private sector's pension funds.

To blame the contingency provisions is scraping the bottom of the barrel. If someone sunk a boat by punching a hole in the bottom of it, would you blame the person who didn't bail out the water fast enough?

Firefighters should not strike. Period. If you don't like the terms and conditions, move. As kentlad says, there's plenty more out there willing to take over.

Is not a race to the bottom. If you failed to defend your pension with combined action not my fault. I do like my terms of conditions, the ones I signed up-to & promised, that's why I'm defending them.

[quote][p][bold]Eagles_Man[/bold] wrote:
"they are on strike due to pension theft". Really? Oh, I must have missed the FBU going on strike and protesting when Labour were robbing the private sector's pension funds.
To blame the contingency provisions is scraping the bottom of the barrel. If someone sunk a boat by punching a hole in the bottom of it, would you blame the person who didn't bail out the water fast enough?
Firefighters should not strike. Period. If you don't like the terms and conditions, move. As kentlad says, there's plenty more out there willing to take over.[/p][/quote]Is not a race to the bottom. If you failed to defend your pension with combined action not my fault. I do like my terms of conditions, the ones I signed up-to & promised, that's why I'm defending them.Hatersgonnahate

Eagles_Man wrote:
&quot;they are on strike due to pension theft". Really? Oh, I must have missed the FBU going on strike and protesting when Labour were robbing the private sector's pension funds.

To blame the contingency provisions is scraping the bottom of the barrel. If someone sunk a boat by punching a hole in the bottom of it, would you blame the person who didn't bail out the water fast enough?

Firefighters should not strike. Period. If you don't like the terms and conditions, move. As kentlad says, there's plenty more out there willing to take over.

There is not plenty waiting to take over as there's a recruitment freeze & redundancies in place.

[quote][p][bold]Eagles_Man[/bold] wrote:
"they are on strike due to pension theft". Really? Oh, I must have missed the FBU going on strike and protesting when Labour were robbing the private sector's pension funds.
To blame the contingency provisions is scraping the bottom of the barrel. If someone sunk a boat by punching a hole in the bottom of it, would you blame the person who didn't bail out the water fast enough?
Firefighters should not strike. Period. If you don't like the terms and conditions, move. As kentlad says, there's plenty more out there willing to take over.[/p][/quote]There is not plenty waiting to take over as there's a recruitment freeze & redundancies in place.Hatersgonnahate

flames18 wrote:
kentlad
you really do not have a clue, go and do some research and stop being so ignorant. it has nothing to do with pay why they are on strike. Also brandon lewis said contingency crews are adequate and up to the job, they clearly are not. they had to wait for a senior officer to arrive before being commited. real firefighters would of been in there 2 minutes after arrival. they are on strike due to pension theft. and would you let a 60 year old woman fight fires. goi do some real research and reply. instead of talking a load of rubbish...my thoughts are with the family

I wasnt just refering to the story above i'm talking about previous strike action over pay and pensions. And i think you will find i do know what i am talking about as i have two relatives who are firemen and even they disagree with strike action but, unfortunatley because most of their moron colleagues feel strike action is acceptable they have no choice but, to follow in their actions.

You are obviously a fireman and i take my hat off to you for doing a great job and i mean that from the heart. I also agree that your pensions should be adequate enough to retire at a reasonable age.

You arent the only people who have been robbed of a pension i have lost thousands over the past few years from my pension company gambling with my money.

If I had just a penny for every '....my relatives a firefighter so I know what I'm talking about...' I wouldn't need to strike defending my pension.
You lost your pension so that perverse logic means I must lose mine? Yes let's race to the bottom to see who gets the worse deal!

[quote][p][bold]kentlad[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]flames18[/bold] wrote:
kentlad
you really do not have a clue, go and do some research and stop being so ignorant. it has nothing to do with pay why they are on strike. Also brandon lewis said contingency crews are adequate and up to the job, they clearly are not. they had to wait for a senior officer to arrive before being commited. real firefighters would of been in there 2 minutes after arrival. they are on strike due to pension theft. and would you let a 60 year old woman fight fires. goi do some real research and reply. instead of talking a load of rubbish...my thoughts are with the family[/p][/quote]I wasnt just refering to the story above i'm talking about previous strike action over pay and pensions. And i think you will find i do know what i am talking about as i have two relatives who are firemen and even they disagree with strike action but, unfortunatley because most of their moron colleagues feel strike action is acceptable they have no choice but, to follow in their actions.
You are obviously a fireman and i take my hat off to you for doing a great job and i mean that from the heart. I also agree that your pensions should be adequate enough to retire at a reasonable age.
You arent the only people who have been robbed of a pension i have lost thousands over the past few years from my pension company gambling with my money.[/p][/quote]If I had just a penny for every '....my relatives a firefighter so I know what I'm talking about...' I wouldn't need to strike defending my pension.
You lost your pension so that perverse logic means I must lose mine? Yes let's race to the bottom to see who gets the worse deal!Hatersgonnahate

Gypo.Joe wrote:
Ohhh poor things having to work until 60. My heart bleeds for the poor overworked fire fairies. Perhaps we will have to get new cots instead of beds for them as they get older incase they fall out in their sleep.

Thanks Joe, you never disappoint x

[quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote:
Ohhh poor things having to work until 60. My heart bleeds for the poor overworked fire fairies. Perhaps we will have to get new cots instead of beds for them as they get older incase they fall out in their sleep.[/p][/quote]Thanks Joe, you never disappoint xHatersgonnahate

kentlad wrote:
Real fireman wouldnt put peoples lives at risk over strike action... there is a huge waiting list to become a fireman so why not give someone who's happy with the pay a job! I respect anyone who are fireman, police officers, nurses etc... and also believe they should receive a decent pay but, do you really think putting peoples lives at risk is the right way to go about getting an increase???

If everyone who were unhappy with their pay were to walk out of their jobs i think you would find 40% or more of the working sector would be at home sitting on their arses right now.

It's firefighters not fireman. The ballot result will reflect the majority supporting the action. There is no waiting list for the fire service in London, recruitment freeze &amp; closure of 10 London stations with need to lose 500 plus posts put paid to any recruitment for the next 5 plus years.

ohhh sorry my mistake its called 'predictive text' most smart phones have it. There is a waiting list i know several people who are waiting for a response however, as you say with all the stations that are closing i wouldnt hold much hope of anyone having success.

Most firefighters i've seen local to me are middle aged fat men... the recruitment process is similar to the Police Force you have to pass fitness tests to be accepted then once your in you just let yourself go!

[quote][p][bold]Hatersgonnahate[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]kentlad[/bold] wrote:
Real fireman wouldnt put peoples lives at risk over strike action... there is a huge waiting list to become a fireman so why not give someone who's happy with the pay a job! I respect anyone who are fireman, police officers, nurses etc... and also believe they should receive a decent pay but, do you really think putting peoples lives at risk is the right way to go about getting an increase???
If everyone who were unhappy with their pay were to walk out of their jobs i think you would find 40% or more of the working sector would be at home sitting on their arses right now.[/p][/quote]It's firefighters not fireman. The ballot result will reflect the majority supporting the action. There is no waiting list for the fire service in London, recruitment freeze & closure of 10 London stations with need to lose 500 plus posts put paid to any recruitment for the next 5 plus years.[/p][/quote]ohhh sorry my mistake its called 'predictive text' most smart phones have it. There is a waiting list i know several people who are waiting for a response however, as you say with all the stations that are closing i wouldnt hold much hope of anyone having success.
Most firefighters i've seen local to me are middle aged fat men... the recruitment process is similar to the Police Force you have to pass fitness tests to be accepted then once your in you just let yourself go!kentlad

Eagles_Man wrote:
&quot;they are on strike due to pension theft". Really? Oh, I must have missed the FBU going on strike and protesting when Labour were robbing the private sector's pension funds.

To blame the contingency provisions is scraping the bottom of the barrel. If someone sunk a boat by punching a hole in the bottom of it, would you blame the person who didn't bail out the water fast enough?

Firefighters should not strike. Period. If you don't like the terms and conditions, move. As kentlad says, there's plenty more out there willing to take over.

There is not plenty waiting to take over as there's a recruitment freeze &amp; redundancies in place.

All because there is a recruitment freeze doesnt mean there arent people out there waiting to be a firefighter.

[quote][p][bold]Hatersgonnahate[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Eagles_Man[/bold] wrote:
"they are on strike due to pension theft". Really? Oh, I must have missed the FBU going on strike and protesting when Labour were robbing the private sector's pension funds.
To blame the contingency provisions is scraping the bottom of the barrel. If someone sunk a boat by punching a hole in the bottom of it, would you blame the person who didn't bail out the water fast enough?
Firefighters should not strike. Period. If you don't like the terms and conditions, move. As kentlad says, there's plenty more out there willing to take over.[/p][/quote]There is not plenty waiting to take over as there's a recruitment freeze & redundancies in place.[/p][/quote]All because there is a recruitment freeze doesnt mean there arent people out there waiting to be a firefighter.kentlad

flames18 wrote:
kentlad
you really do not have a clue, go and do some research and stop being so ignorant. it has nothing to do with pay why they are on strike. Also brandon lewis said contingency crews are adequate and up to the job, they clearly are not. they had to wait for a senior officer to arrive before being commited. real firefighters would of been in there 2 minutes after arrival. they are on strike due to pension theft. and would you let a 60 year old woman fight fires. goi do some real research and reply. instead of talking a load of rubbish...my thoughts are with the family

I wasnt just refering to the story above i'm talking about previous strike action over pay and pensions. And i think you will find i do know what i am talking about as i have two relatives who are firemen and even they disagree with strike action but, unfortunatley because most of their moron colleagues feel strike action is acceptable they have no choice but, to follow in their actions.

You are obviously a fireman and i take my hat off to you for doing a great job and i mean that from the heart. I also agree that your pensions should be adequate enough to retire at a reasonable age.

You arent the only people who have been robbed of a pension i have lost thousands over the past few years from my pension company gambling with my money.

If I had just a penny for every '....my relatives a firefighter so I know what I'm talking about...' I wouldn't need to strike defending my pension.
You lost your pension so that perverse logic means I must lose mine? Yes let's race to the bottom to see who gets the worse deal!

You really have no brains either that or you cant read... where have i stated you should lose yours because i've lost thousands. If you read my posts again you will see i agree that the firefighters should receive better pay and pensions what i am disagreeing with is the strike action. I dont decide not to turn up to work some days all because my investment firm has gambled my savings into a black hole and made my pensions pot smaller long term!

[quote][p][bold]Hatersgonnahate[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]kentlad[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]flames18[/bold] wrote:
kentlad
you really do not have a clue, go and do some research and stop being so ignorant. it has nothing to do with pay why they are on strike. Also brandon lewis said contingency crews are adequate and up to the job, they clearly are not. they had to wait for a senior officer to arrive before being commited. real firefighters would of been in there 2 minutes after arrival. they are on strike due to pension theft. and would you let a 60 year old woman fight fires. goi do some real research and reply. instead of talking a load of rubbish...my thoughts are with the family[/p][/quote]I wasnt just refering to the story above i'm talking about previous strike action over pay and pensions. And i think you will find i do know what i am talking about as i have two relatives who are firemen and even they disagree with strike action but, unfortunatley because most of their moron colleagues feel strike action is acceptable they have no choice but, to follow in their actions.
You are obviously a fireman and i take my hat off to you for doing a great job and i mean that from the heart. I also agree that your pensions should be adequate enough to retire at a reasonable age.
You arent the only people who have been robbed of a pension i have lost thousands over the past few years from my pension company gambling with my money.[/p][/quote]If I had just a penny for every '....my relatives a firefighter so I know what I'm talking about...' I wouldn't need to strike defending my pension.
You lost your pension so that perverse logic means I must lose mine? Yes let's race to the bottom to see who gets the worse deal![/p][/quote]You really have no brains either that or you cant read... where have i stated you should lose yours because i've lost thousands. If you read my posts again you will see i agree that the firefighters should receive better pay and pensions what i am disagreeing with is the strike action. I dont decide not to turn up to work some days all because my investment firm has gambled my savings into a black hole and made my pensions pot smaller long term!kentlad

Gypo.Joe wrote:
Ohhh poor things having to work until 60. My heart bleeds for the poor overworked fire fairies. Perhaps we will have to get new cots instead of beds for them as they get older incase they fall out in their sleep.

[quote][p][bold]Hatersgonnahate[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Gypo.Joe[/bold] wrote:
Ohhh poor things having to work until 60. My heart bleeds for the poor overworked fire fairies. Perhaps we will have to get new cots instead of beds for them as they get older incase they fall out in their sleep.[/p][/quote]Thanks Joe, you never disappoint x[/p][/quote]Hi Haters, I knew a little red meat would coax you out of hiding.
How's it hanging son ?
@ Ginger "Most firefighters i've seen local to me are middle aged fat men..."
Morning Ginge, you must see or know the same ones as me boi. ;)Gypo.Joe

kentlad, your posts are ill-informed, ignorantly written and offensive. My sister and brother-in-law are "real" firefighters, they do not wish to strike but to not do so would be letting down their colleagues. This Tory government is attempting to force through changes to the firefighters' pension scheme which will increase their pension contributions, decrease the value of their pension and raise their retirement age to 60 whilst seeking to sack those who are not fit enough. If you don't consider those issues worth striking for, I can only assume you are one of these people who think strikes should be outlawed altogether in any industry. Oh, and if you think firefighters have "blood on their hands", try telling that to me, my sister or brother-in-law face-to-face. I rather suspect you might require another emergency service afterwards.

kentlad, your posts are ill-informed, ignorantly written and offensive. My sister and brother-in-law are "real" firefighters, they do not wish to strike but to not do so would be letting down their colleagues. This Tory government is attempting to force through changes to the firefighters' pension scheme which will increase their pension contributions, decrease the value of their pension and raise their retirement age to 60 whilst seeking to sack those who are not fit enough. If you don't consider those issues worth striking for, I can only assume you are one of these people who think strikes should be outlawed altogether in any industry. Oh, and if you think firefighters have "blood on their hands", try telling that to me, my sister or brother-in-law face-to-face. I rather suspect you might require another emergency service afterwards.Mikey lad